Effect of 2011 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Duty-Hour Regulations on Objective Measures of Surgical Training

ObjectiveIn July 2011, new Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education duty-hour regulations were implemented in surgical residency programs. We examined whether differences in objective measures of surgical training exist at our institution since implementation.DesignRetrospective reviews of the American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination performance and surgical case volume were collected for 5 academic years. Data were separated into 2 groups, Period 1: July 2008 through June 2011 and Period 2: July 2011 through June 2013.SettingSingle-institution study conducted at the Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, NY, a tertiary-care academic center.ParticipantsAll general surgery residents, levels postgraduate year 1 through 5, from July 2008 through June 2013.ResultsNo significant differences in the American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination total correct score or overall test percentile were noted between periods for any levels. Intern case volume increased significantly in Period 2 (90 vs 77, p = 0.036). For chief residents graduating in Period 2, there was a significant increase in total major cases (1062 vs 945, p = 0.002) and total chief cases (305 vs 267, p = 0.02).ConclusionsThe duty-hour regulations did not negatively affect objective measures of surgical training in our program. Compliance with the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education duty-hour regulations correlated with an increase in case volume. Adaptations made by our institution, such as maximizing daytime duty hours and increasing physician extenders, likely contributed to our findings.